The newest thinking in the subfield of poetic translation studies is overwhelmingly concerned with the poet-translator. What is their poetic, social, and political role in the translation process? What is their day-to-day, and even moment-to-moment, translational process, and how does it relate to their own poetic practice? What assumptions and motivations underlie the reception of the poet-translator's work? Reading recent developments in the field alongside the exciting new work by the contributors to this special cluster, it becomes clear that translator creativity is at the heart of new theories of poetic translation. Or, rather, what appears to be driving the consensus in thinking from both practitioners and scholars alike is the discovery that translation is at the heart of creativity, period. The poet-translator has always contended with conflicting stereotypes about their work: on the one hand, the poet is often considered the best and sometimes only translator qualified to translate poetry; on the other, the poet is just as often denigrated as the worst possible translator of poetry, one who constantly allows their own poetics to overrun that of the source text. Wary of arbitrary designations of quality and morality, today's scholars embrace poet-translator creativity in all its variations and emphasize poetic translation's simultaneous roles as world-revealing critique and world-making creativity.This vision of translation is made possible in large part by Lawrence Venuti's radical updating of the hermeneutic model of translation, which he developed in a series of essays published in the collec-tionTranslation Changes Everything (2013) and in the manifesto Contra Instrumentalism (2019). In the latter, Venuti argues against the prevailing model of translation as an instrument for conveying the "invariant"